Photographing the Community: Sarah Hoskins

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126246445

The above link is for an article/video found on NPR's website about Sarah Hoskins, a local Lexingtonite who has been photographing the small towns that she has come to call "The Hometown". These small communities are the contemporary spaces created by freed slaves in the 1860's and 1870's.

The article raised some questions for me about community engaged art that I had not really considered before. At the end of the article the article mentions that Hoskins is considering wrapping the project up. But how can she do that? I'm not saying she shouldn't, just how does that work out. How can she stop working with the community? In the article it mentions over and over how she is now a part of those communities. She is considered family. Does the nature of her project change when she stops it? Especially if she continues to use the photographs after she stops taking them? Does the relationship switch? How does she tell the community that clearly loves her that she is done? What will the reaction be?

I think this is a major dilemma artist's face when working with the community. Gaining the trust of community takes time and commitment. When it ends it seems almost like a break up and possibly a betrayal. Yet, the an artist shouldn't have to give up one's whole life for this work. Or should they? And why or why not?

Some prevent this dilemma from becoming an issue by setting a deadline in the beginning. Documentary film makers often do that. But what happens if the trust isn't developed within that time line or if something outside of the time line occurs that could lead to more interesting information and better material for the project. Or something else comes up that could be used by the artist that would be better for the community. Doesn't that time line limit as much if not more than the potential bad break up with the community can/does?